In this Editorial I would like to recall the words from another Editorial in 2017: “In recent decades, Evidence- Based Medicine has assumed an important role in clinical practice, in the various fields of Medicine. Thus, clinical (and radiological!) practice should not be based on impressions or opinions, but rather on results of scientific investigation, published after rigorous peer review and critique.”

If, at that time, I reflected on the role of Research in Radiology, in the present Editorial I intend to highlight the fundamental role of Journals and other medical publications in the dissemination of Research and highlight the importance of the evaluation carried out by the Reviewers.

The Editorial Board depends on the knowledge and “expertise” of the Reviewers, for the appreciation and critique of the various articles submitted to the Acta Radiológica (ARP), so that the best ones are selected for publication.

Published articles will influence the clinical practice of ARP readers and, therefore, a rigorous and critical review of manuscripts submitted and accepted for publication is essential. To this end, the Reviewers chosen by the Editorial Board must be recognized experts in the area of knowledge of the article.

In the review process, ARP usually attaches a Review form, to help the reviewers in their task, registering the originality of the article, the priority for publication, the quality of the text, figures, bibliographical references, etc. In addition to these questions, the Reviewer must briefly indicate the strengths and weaknesses of the article and comments, suggestions for revision or correction to be sent to the authors. Finally, the Reviewer must send his/her suggestion to the Editor (accepted for publication, required revisions, rejection).

The work of the Reviewer, done in a double-blind manner, is a commendable work, which requires availability to review the article within the defined deadline, in order to avoid delays in the editorial process. At the same time, the work of the Reviewer is a hidden work, carried out anonymously and free of charge and, rarely, properly recognized. This Editorial therefore intends, in the first place, to thank all ARP Reviewers for the extraordinary work and availability demonstrated, which bring about the success of the ARP and the publication and dissemination of the Authors’ work. Secondly, it intends to appeal to all Radiologists to consider the invitations received and, once the invitation is accepted, to comply with the review submission deadline, so that the Authors who choose the ARP for publication of their works are not disappointed and the deadlines of the editorial process are as quick as possible.

The commitment and quality of the Reviewers are fundamental for the improvement of the papers submitted and for the final quality of the articles published, which will undoubtedly have a great impact on the good practices in our clinical activity.

Best wishes for an excellent New Year!

Manuela França (Fig. 1)